It’s hard to imagine a more painful mistake than accidentally pumping gasoline into the tank of a diesel car, resulting in costly engine damage. Now Volkswagen is taking steps to make sure it never happens.

The leading maker of diesel cars in the U.S. plans to retrofit 209,500 cars with barriers to make sure motorists can’t mistakenly pump gas into their tanks, Automotive News reports. The service action will cover 209,500 cars in the U.S. built between 2009 and 2012. It includes the diesel versions of Jetta, Golf and Jetta SportWagen.

Automotive News obtained a memo from VW to its dealers in which its notes that more misfueling incidents have occurred as diesels have become more popular. And it tired of being in the bad-guy role since such mistakes aren’t covered by warranty and can result in ill will with customers. VW’s fix is a fuel filler cap and sleeve to try to keep out gas nozzles, which have a smaller diameter than diesel fuel nozzles. The report says the government has received about 160 complaints about the problem. Diesel cars provide longer range than gas-fueled cars.

Article source: http://www.freep.com/article/20130522/BUSINESS0104/305220106/volkswagen-gasoline-diesel

They didn’t have to run over a custom 1969 Ford Mustang with a tank. The 2008 BMW M5, one of several demolished, didn’t need to be thrown through a building. And the 1970 Ford Escort Mark 1 — beloved in the United Kingdom — didn’t need to be tossed 70 feet in the air over a freeway divider with a live stunt driver behind the wheel. Twice.

“He likes to use as little CG as possible,” said Dennis McCarthy of “Fast Furious 6″ director Justin Lin, referring to computer-generated imagery. From his sprawling shop in Los Angeles’ Sun Valley neighborhood, McCarthy has assembled and modified millions of dollars of cars for each of the last four “Fast” films Lin has directed. The latest installment opens on Friday.

PHOTOS: The cars of ‘Fast Furious 6′

Fans of the “Fast” franchise are more eager to see two tons of steel with 600 horsepower on the big screen than they are to hear Vin Diesel growl one-liners or see Michelle Rodriguez and mixed martial arts fighter-turned-actor Gina Carano throw each other down a flight of stairs.

This means the computers play only a minor role as hundreds of cars — and the souls brave enough to drive them — become the true heroes and villains of “Fast Furious 6.”

Which explains why audiences are treated to the memorable sight of a small, blue Ford Escort hurtling through the air like an errant metal softball.

The stunt was a product of a messy trial-and-error process, McCarthy explained as he stood over one of the only examples of the Ford Escort Mark 1 to survive the shoot. The sheer number of stunts left little time for planning.

The scene calls for Paul Walker’s character to jump the median of a highway in his car, to come to the aid of Tyrese Gibson’s character, whose Ford Mustang is quickly being overrun by a tank.

The first live attempt at jumping the car didn’t go as planned. With too much speed carried off the ramp, the car overshot its landing and came down nose-first, flipping violently onto its roof and destroying the car.

“It really rung the driver’s bell,” McCarthy said, chuckling.

After making some quick adjustments to a second car and hitting the ramp at a few mph slower, the crew was able to get the shot we see. Barely. Though it landed and successfully drove out of the shot, the impact left the car “shaped like a banana,” McCarthy said.

Although American audiences may not appreciate the significance of the petite Ford being set airborne, car fans across the pond likely will. The lightweight, rallye-inspired sedans were as deified in the U.K. as American muscle cars were in the U.S. in the late 1960s and early 1970s.

Collecting numerous copies of such a car wasn’t a cheap proposition. And each of the characters favors at least one specialized car in the film.

Diesel’s Dom is an American muscle aficionado. He lands behind the wheel of a 1969 Dodge Daytona, a 2010 Dodge Challenger and a 1970 Plymouth Barracuda.

Walker’s character is an import guy, and pilots two late-model Nissan GT-Rs and the aforementioned Escort. Tyrese has his 1969 Mustang, Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson has a mammoth Navistar MXT truck, and Rodriguez spends most of her time in a rare 1973 Jensen Interceptor.

There’s also a custom-built faux tank riding on a heavy-duty truck chassis, 2012 Dodge Charger and Alfa Romeo Giuliettas that were part of a product tie-in with Chrysler, and the villain’s custom-built “flip car” that looks and drives like an exoskeleton of the modern Batmobile.

Many of the older cars were heavily modified for the rigors of the stunts and several examples were needed for each car. Given the prohibitively high cost of buying pristine, original versions of cars like the 1969 Daytona or Mustang, close replicas were built.

Although these copies would be identifiable as fakes to the naked eye, they are still fully capable cars with around 800 total horsepower.

“We definitely mistreated the poor thing,” said Ben Collins of the Daytona. Collins, who gained notoriety as the mysterious Stig test driver on BBC’s “Top Gear,” was the stunt driver for several breathtaking chase scenes in “Fast Furious 6.”

Article source: http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-hy-fast-and-furious-cars-20130522,0,4447347.story

Nissan

Lease deals and tax incentives add appeal to electric cars like the Nissan Leaf.

This car deal sounds too good to be true: Drive a car, almost free.

Steep discounts and public subsidies have more and more consumers considering electric cars. Eyes on the Road columnist Joe White Joins Lunch Break with a look at how going electric could end up putting money in drivers’ pockets.

To entice drivers to try electric-powered cars, auto makers are lowering the price of entry to the zero-emission lifestyle.

A new round of discount leases on mainstream-brand plug-in cars such as the Nissan

Leaf or Fiat

500e, combined with federal, state and local electric-vehicle incentives, could make a battery-electric car an extraordinarily economical way to get around for drivers. There are two big caveats: Drivers need to live in states offering tax incentives and can’t drive very far in a single day.

Enlarge Image

David Walter Banks for The Wall Street Journal

Bronson Beisel got an extra subsidy from Georgia, cutting the cost further.

Electric cars are still a long way from achieving mass appeal. Plug-in cars accounted for less than 1% of total vehicle sales in the U.S. during the first four months of this year, according to data compiled by the website hybridcars.com. But the flurry of discounts and public subsidies has more consumers refiguring the math. Plug-in sales more than doubled in the first four months of 2013 compared with a year earlier.

Bronson Beisel, 46, says he was looking last fall for an alternative to driving his gas-guzzling Ford Expedition sport utility around suburban Atlanta, when he saw a discounted lease offer for an all-electric Nissan Leaf. With $1,000 down, Mr. Beisel says he got a two-year lease for total out-of-pocket payments of $7,009, a deal that reflects a $7,500 federal tax credit.

As a resident of Georgia, Mr. Beisel is also eligible for a $5,000 subsidy from the state government. Now, he says, his out-of-pocket costs for 24 months in the Leaf are just over $2,000. Factor in the $200 a month he reckons he isn’t paying for gasoline to fill up his hulking SUV, and Mr. Beisel says “suddenly the car puts $2,000 in my pocket.”

Yes, he pays for electricity to charge the Leaf’s 24-kilowatt-hour battery—but not much. “In March, I spent $14.94 to charge the car” and a bit less than that in April, he says. He also got an electric car-charging station installed at his house for no upfront cost.

“It’s like a two-year test drive, free,” he says.

Mr. Beisel works for IBM designing presentations that company sales representatives use to convince clients they’ll save money investing in new technology. He says he did a similar analysis on his family’s lifestyle and concluded that the Leaf’s 73-mile range was plenty for most of his everyday driving.

Auto makers are under mounting state regulatory pressure in about a dozen states to accelerate electric-car sales. California greenhouse-gas rules, for instance, require that, by 2018, some 4.5% of the cars major auto makers sell in the state be “zero-emission” vehicles—that is, no emissions from the car.

View Graphics

Mike Sudal/The Wall Street Journal

By 2025, California’s rules mandate that electric cars account for more than 15% of sales in the state. The Obama administration has backed the California mandate, although it didn’t order similar targets nationwide.

Right now, that sales mandate looks like a marketing Mount Everest.

Only two all-electric cars, the Nissan Leaf and the Tesla Model S, sold more than 1,000 vehicles during the first quarter of the year, according to hybridcars.com data. By comparison, Ford Motor Co.

sold more than 2,000 of its plus-size F-Series pickup trucks a day during March.

Car makers are lobbying the federal government to block the California mandate. But some are also boosting efforts to convince more people that electric cars make sense. One reason: Selling more high-mileage cars allows auto makers to market greater numbers of larger, more profitable vehicles, under the complex government emission-regulation schemes.

Nissan Motor Corp., the mass-market car maker most heavily invested in electric transportation, is accelerating production of the Leaf and its costly lithium-ion battery packs at factories in Tennessee, replacing cars shipped from Japan. That made it possible to drop the starting price of the least-expensive 2013 Leaf to $28,800, down $6,400 from 2012, company officials say.

Nissan has begun offering leases as low as $199 a month for three years, or no-interest, three-year loans for customers who prefer to buy the car. For 2013, the Leaf gets an enhanced warranty on the battery, a faster charger (cutting time from seven hours to four when plugged into a 220-volt circuit) and new options such as leather seats.

Me My Car

• 
  
  Finding a Car With Higher Clearance
  
  

Matt Brooks, a software engineer in Rochester, N.Y., says he decided to replace a hybrid Prius with a Leaf because the lease was so cheap. He’s paying $239 a month for 24 months with no money down. Mr. Brooks says he likes the car, but doesn’t expect to buy it when the lease is done. Used Leafs are selling below the purchase price written into his lease, he says.

Electric-car makers are also experimenting with new responses to the problem of “range anxiety.” That’s the fear would-be buyers have of getting stranded should the battery run down faster than advertised.

Luxury electric-car maker Tesla Motors Inc.,

which recently rolled out a lease-like financing option, has models rated as high as 265 miles on a charge, and a growing line of dedicated fast-charging stations. But its Model S sedans start at $62,400 after the $7,500 federal tax credit.

Among less expensive solutions, Nissan engineered the 2013 Leaf with a new range-extending drive mode the company says can increase the distance it can travel on a single charge by up to 15%, to 84 miles, by allowing the customer to choose to use up 100% of the energy stored in the battery.

The government takes a more conservative view, crediting the 2013 Leaf with a 75-mile range. It is also stepping up efforts to persuade employers and local governments to install more charging stations.

Fiat SpA’s U.S. sales arm is offering 12 days of free annual access to a gasoline rental car, for long-distance trips, as part of the cost of its new 500e electric (starting price: $32,500). Matt Davis of Fiat USA says the rental-car deal, branded as ePass, grew out of brainstorming sessions where company officials debated how to deal with the car’s 87-mile range. “We have nothing to overcome that,” he says.

Write to Joseph B. White at joseph.white@wsj.com

Article source: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323982704578453123010639156.html

Autos

9 hours ago

While we’re not exactly sure when or where it happened, some green-minded U.S. motorist helped the nascent battery car market reach a critical milestone this past weekend, purchasing the 100,000th plug-in vehicle – or so claims the advocacy group Plug-In America.

“Our current estimate, based on monthly sales figures from automakers, is that the 100,000th highway-capable plug-in vehicle (was) sold on May 20,” said Tom Saxton, Plug In America’s chief science officer. “We are calling this the #PIA100K mark, and we are excited to see the continued growth of the market.”

Read more at The Detroit Bureau: Speed Racer – Aston Martin’s CC100 Concept

Proponents are hailing the news and noting that it’s been barely three years since the launch of the modern battery-car industry with the nearly simultaneous debuts of the Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid and the Nissan Leaf battery-electric vehicles.

Since then, similar products have hit the market, from the little Chevrolet Spark battery car to the new Porsche 918 plug-in supercar, which the German maker announced last week. In fact, most major automakers expect to have some form of plug-based vehicle for sale by next year, if only to meet California’s demanding new Zero-Emission Vehicle mandate.

Read more at The Detroit Bureau:Driverless Cars Draw Strong Public Interest

Despite the new offerings, sales have fallen short of expectations. The Obama Administration, for example, drove into D.C. promising to help put 1 million plug-based vehicles on the road by 2015. Few now believe that’s possible.

All forms of battery-based vehicles, from so-called “mild” hybrids to battery-electric vehicles, constitute a mere 3 percent of U.S. new vehicle sales. Leave out conventional hybrids – such as the best-selling Toyota Prius – and the figure flops to barely 0.5 percent.

There are positive signs. Tesla outpaced its own modest first-quarter expectations for the Model-S battery sedan, delivering the California maker its first-ever profit. Nissan has seen a surge in Leaf sales since shifting production to the U.S. and cutting prices earlier this year.

The high cost of battery technology is generally viewed as a major obstacle for products like the Volt. There’s also the question of limited range. Tesla is offering nearly 300 miles per charge with its optional battery pack for the Model S. It has begun setting up a network of so-called Superchargers.

In fact, a new study predicts the number of places to plug in will increase 100-fold, to more than 13 million plug-in spots worldwide, which could ease what is being called “range anxiety.”

For now, don’t expect a surge. After all, Toyota sells more Camry sedans in three months than all the plug-ins currently on U.S. roads.

Copyright © 2009-2013, The Detroit Bureau

Article source: http://www.nbcnews.com/business/100-000-electric-cars-sold-expectations-lag-6C9996523

You’re at the rental car counter. When you’re done deciding whether to get the compact car or the midsize, there’s another question to consider: Should you pay ahead of time for a full tank of gasoline?

Rental car companies usually offer the option of paying for a full tank of gas before you drive off the lot. That way you don’t have to worry about topping the tank off before you return the car.

But many business trekkers say no thanks.

“Most expert travelers … know that this is pretty much a serious win for the rental car companies,” Geoffrey Plummer, a small business consultant based in Jacksonville Beach, Fla., says of prepaying. “While there is a subtle benefit to the thought that you don’t have to stop and refill the tank when returning the car, you almost always leave gas in the tank and money on the table.”

MORE: Car renters disagree on pre-pay fuel option
TRAVELER’S AIDE: I reserved a rental car; why isn’t it here?

But USA TODAY’s most recent survey in 2011 of gasoline prices at airport rental-car outlets found that it could pay off many times to pay ahead of time — as they often charged less than the average price at nearby gas stations. The national average price for gasoline at the time was pushing $4 a gallon.

David Campbell, a regional sales manager who lives in Yorktown, Va., has seen that firsthand. Though his company won’t allow him to prepay for gas, Campbell sometimes does it when he’s taking a personal road trip. “It is just (a way) for me to make the hassle of traveling a little easier,” he says. “When I’ve stopped and filled the tank with gas, I find that the amount I put in is pretty close” in price to the prepay offer.

If you choose not to prepay, be sure to not return the car with a half empty tank. If you do, it’ll cost you.

The USA TODAY survey, which looked at 13 big airports, found some rental car outlets were charging more than $9 a gallon if a customer showed up with less than a full tank and hadn’t filled up or bought gasoline up front. That meant a customer renting a Ford Club Wagon with its 35-gallon tank could have ended up paying more than $300.

“There’s a significant premium you’re paying for being lazy or forgetting that the rental car company holds you responsible for fuel that’s used,” says Neil Abrams, a consultant to the auto rental industry.

ARCHIVES: Zagat survey ranks Hertz as best auto rental brand
MORE: Plan and save with these pre-pay car rental programs

Abrams says that in over three decades, he’s never taken rental car companies up on their offer and prepaid for gasoline. “I’m … confident that I will replace the fuel in the car before I return it,” he says. But he adds that prepaying could be worth it for some drivers, particularly when traveling to certain cities.

“There are certain markets that are stressful to find gas,” Abrams says, adding that Boston is one. A renter might drive for miles, he says, racing to catch a flight out of Logan Airport and never spot a station.

“It’s a service and a convenience offered by rental companies,” Abrams says of the prepaid offer. “There are customers that take it because they just don’t want to have to worry about fueling the vehicle on the return, or they’re worried they won’t have the time or won’t be able to find a location, and it’s just less stressful to do it this way.”

PROS AND CONS

Alice Pereira, a spokeswoman for Avis Budget Group, which operates both the Avis and Budget rental car brands, agrees that their prepaid gasoline option can save renters time, and the cost is “comparable to those prices charged at local gas stations.”

If you don’t prepay or fill the tank before dropping off the rental, “the per-gallon price we charge for refilling the tank is typically a few dollars higher than” than what you’d find at local gas stations, Pereira says.

Bruce Thomas, a meteorologist who lives in Lenexa, Kan., says he rents a car nearly every week. And squeezing in one more business appointment is a better use of time than making a mad dash to the pump before his flight departs.

“If you are able to make a longer or extra sales call … without having to worry about finding a gas station to fill the tank,” prepaying is a good idea, he says.

Thomas says his company doesn’t allow him to take the prepay option. But “when I rent on a family or personal trip I generally do buy the full tank and just make sure we are running on fumes when returning the car.”

Others think prepaying for gasoline is a good deal for rental car companies, but not for travelers.

Don’t do it, says Avi Rosenthal, a vice president of security who lives in San Diego, “unless you can push the car in with an empty tank. Any other scenario and you are just buying gas for the next person.”

Steve Milby says that he prepaid for gasoline — once.

“I knew I would be cutting it close when I returned to the airport, and I thought I was going to use all the gas and get my money’s worth,” says Milby, a general manager for Sears parts and repair centers who lives in Marietta, Ga.

Instead, he says, the tank was about one-third full when he turned the car in. “I’ve always perceived the prepay option as a way for me to buy some gas for the rental car company,” he says. “It also tempts you to drive around close to empty, which is never a good idea.”

David Bennett, a jail consultant based in Park City, Utah, agrees that prepaying for gasoline and then having to make sure the tank is drained to the last drop doesn’t make much sense. It’s “not worth the aggravation,” he says.

But Abrams, the rental car consultant, says that while a driver may lose a few dollars by prepaying and then leaving a few gallons in the tank, it may be worth the peace of mind that you don’t have to hunt down a station on your way out of town.

“So be it,” he says. “It’s a write-off.”

TRAVEL ADVICE: Deals, experts, money-saving travel tips

Article source: http://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/advice/2013/05/21/rental-cars-worth-it-prepay-for-gas/2346651/

<!–

• 
  
  Text Size
• Print
• Reprints

–>

Will self-driving cars let the government track your every move? Greg Beato says yes, and Randal O’Toole disagrees. Beato is right: Self-driving cars will make it easier for the authorities to track you everywhere you go. But the benefits of self-driving cars are likely to be so enormous that American consumers will sign up in droves, regardless of the privacy implications.

(Cars.com)

We know this because American consumers have already enthusiastically adopted a technology that allows the government to track their every movement: the cellphone. To complete incoming calls, your cellphone company needs to know where you are at all times. A few brave souls have rejected the technology on privacy grounds, but most have signed up without giving it a second thought.

The story will be much the same for self-driving cars. “None of the self-driving cars being developed by Volkswagen, Google or other companies rely at all on central computers. Instead, all the computing power is built into each car,” O’Toole writes. It’s true that self-driving cars won’t be directly controlled by a central computer. But there are several reasons to expect self-driving cars to be equipped with always-on cellular connections.

The most important is safety. Software bugs in a self-driving car are a matter of life or death. So companies in charge of self-driving software will want a mechanism to push out software updates as soon as they are ready. Waiting until a vehicle happens to be near a WiFi connection could lead to preventable accidents.

An always-on wireless connection has other benefits, too. It can alert vehicles to hazardous conditions such as slippery roads, flooding or collapsed bridges. It can provide real-time traffic updates, allowing autonomous vehicles to automatically route around traffic jams.

And a cellular connection will be essential for vehicles to navigate without anyone inside them. This will allow them to drop off their passengers at the door and then look for parking farther away. It will make possible driverless taxis, which will be affordable to many more people. Such cars will need a wireless connection so they can be hailed when needed.

So self-driving cars will have an always-on wireless connection, which will make them inherently trackable. And while that will alarm some privacy advocates, the benefits of self-driving cars dwarf the potential harms. Cars driven by human beings kill about 30,000 people each year in the United States. Self-driving technology could dramatically reduce that figure. Self-driving technology will enable expanded car-sharing, saving thousands of acres currently wasted on parking lots. And the technology will free up billions of person-hours currently devoted to the drudgery of commuting every year.

Fights over privacy in the self-driving future will focus on many of the same issues that are currently being debated with regard to cellphones. Governments currently claim broad power to seek location records from cellphone companies without judicial oversight. Reforming those laws to require the government to get a warrant before seeking historical records for a cellular connection would protect the privacy of both mobile phone users and self-driving car passengers.

Better data retention policies could also enhance users’ privacy. If companies delete information about users’ locations promptly, that would reduce the potential for the information to be abused later.

Finally, some privacy-conscious consumers buy prepaid cellphones to avoid having their calls linked to their identities. Self-driving taxi companies may offer similar options for those who want to travel without leaving a trail.

But opposing self-driving technology because of the privacy concerns makes about as much sense as opposing cellphones for privacy reasons.

Article source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/05/21/self-driving-cars-are-a-privacy-nightmare-and-its-totally-worth-it/

DENVER – Thieves are able to steal cars with the help of unsuspecting tow truck companies and 7NEWS found the loophole will remain wide open.

Watch the undercover investigation on 7NEWS tonigh at 10 p.m.

With little to no proof, 7NEWS discovered anyone can have a car towed to them without verifying they have any connection or ownership to the vehicle.

In an undercover investigation, 7NEWS was able to have multiple tow truck companies tow a vehicle from a residential neighborhood and bring it to a waiting CALL7 producer, with few questions asked.

In December, 7NEWS showed exclusive surveillance video of a tow truck towing a custom 1988 Chevy Caprice from outside of a Denver home. The resident reported the vehicle stolen.  Denver Police and Denver Public Works both confirmed the agencies did not have the vehicle towed.

After airing three stories, trying to identify the tow truck, the driver came forward and revealed someone called to have the car towed to a neighborhood in downtown Denver. According to the tow ticket, the person who called for the tow gave the name “Jason Whitten” and paid cash at the destination.

About two weeks after the tow, Denver Police arrested Sedrick Bowers and charged him with motor vehicle theft. Bowers is now serving 12 years in prison for stealing the Chevy Caprice.

The tow truck driver was not charged and the company did not receive any violation.

The Public Utilities Commission regulates tow truck companies when the tow is “non-consensual.” When a driver calls a tow company directly, it’s considered a “consensual” tow and is not regulated with detailed rules by the PUC.

A non-consensual tow typically involves a car being towed from private property. When this happens, the PUC regulations requires authorization from:

-Law enforcement

- Vehicle’s registered owner

- Authorized operator of the vehicle

- Authorized agent of the owner

- Property owner

In our first test, CALL7 producer Michael de Yoanna called for a car to be towed from a Stapleton neighborhood to downtown Denver.

He was able to request the tow with only his first name, phone number, vehicle description, pickup address, drop-off address and agreement to meet the driver and pay cash at the drop-off location.

When the car arrived at the drop-off location, he paid $100 cash and the driver unhooked the vehicle.

7NEWS reporter Marshall Zelinger approached the driver after he unhooked the car.

“Excuse me, sir? Do you know whose vehicle this is?” asked Zelinger.

“Right there,” said the tow truck driver while pointing to our CALL7 producer.

“Did you verify the owner of the car before you picked it up and towed it?” asked Zelinger.

“He’s right there,” said the tow truck driver, again pointing at our CALL7 producer.

“Did he tell you he was the owner of the car?” asked Zelinger.

“Are you the owner?” the tow truck driver asked our CALL7 producer.

Our producer shook his head, “no.”

“Whose car is it?” the tow truck driver asked.

“He just told you it’s not his car, but you towed it. Is that legal?” Zelinger asked.

“He paid cash. You got to call my boss,”  the tow truck driver said.

“It’s OK to tow anybody’s car even if it’s not yours if you pay cash?” asked Zelinger.

“It was cleared with the office, not me,” said the tow truck driver.

About 20 minutes after the car was unhooked, the owner of the tow company contacted us and agreed to be interviewed.

“My driver called me and said, ‘Hey, Channel 7′s here,’ so I said, ‘OK, let me give them a call,” said tow company owner Don Heald.

7NEWS is not identifying the tow company because it did not violate current law.

“How do you know the car you’re picking up belongs to the person who called for it?” asked Zelinger.

“We don’t,” said Heald.

“Should you?” asked Zelinger

“Sure, ideally we should. There’s a lot of different scenarios out there,” said Heald.

He described a scenario where a University of Colorado student is driving her stepfather’s car, when it breaks down. He then asked what is he supposed to do if she has a different last name than what is on the registration?

“Are you going to leave a consumer stranded on the side of the road, saying, ‘Can’t help you?’”Heald asked. “If tow companies have to arrive on scene, have the registered owner present with the vehicle every single time, show their driver’s license, show their registration, in order for the tow company to tow the vehicle, there’s not going to be a whole lot of vehicles towed.”

“Did you have permission from the owner or authorized operator or authorized agent of the owner?” asked Zelinger.

“Absolutely. Right there. What we were given is what we used to tow that vehicle,” said Heald referring to the tow ticket the tow company filled out.

“What’s Michael’s last name?” asked Zelinger.

“I have no idea. It’s just Michael at 720-xxx-xxxx,” said Heald.

“Where does he live?” asked Zelinger.

“I have no idea, I’m assuming this location address,” said Heald.

“Shouldn’t you know, even his last name, before you do a tow?” asked Zelinger.

“Even on the motor clubs we don’t get first names, we get Mr. and Mrs.,” said Heald.

“Just someone on the phone who said, ‘My name is Michael, I have a car that needs to be towed,’ that’s authorized permission from the owner?” asked Zelinger.

“As the rules stand now, to my knowledge, yes, verbal. Somebody calls, then yes,” said Heald. “This was a request tow by what we believed — by what we were led to believe to be the owner of that vehicle.”

“Why were you led to believe he was the owner?” asked Zelinger.

“Because he told us he was. He said he needed a tow. We assumed that he was the owner of that vehicle,” said Heald.

“That does not make him authorized to have the vehicle towed then, does it?” asked Zelinger.

“No, not in this case,” said Heald. “If you can point out to where we’ve done something wrong, bring it to my attention. I’ll make changes immediately, effective immediately,” said Heald.

7NEWS tested another tow company. This time, our CALL7 producer was asked his last name. However, the result was the same. The vehicle was towed from a Centennial neighborhood to Downtown Denver without verifying any proof of connection to the vehicle.

“Hi there, I’m Marshall from Channel 7. Did you do anything to verify that he is the owner of that car before you towed it?” asked Zelinger.

The tow truck driver did not answer.

“Did you ever verify who the owner was or that he was the owner?” asked Zelinger.

The driver then started to pull away as Zelinger asked, “Does it matter who owns a car before you tow it?”

“I’ve never seen a state law or a rule that says before a tow company can tow a vehicle — that’s not a non-consent, that’s a consent tow — that the owner has to be on scene and has to prove that they actually, in fact, own that vehicle,” said Heald.

“Because Michael was not the owner of the vehicle, wasn’t it a non-consent tow?” asked Zelinger.

“No, it was not a non-consent tow,” said Heald. “We do our due diligence to make sure that we’re doing the job right and we’re out there to help people. We’re not out there to steal cars and that’s not what we done today.”

We took our findings to PUC director Doug Dean.

“Have we revealed a gray area?” Zelinger asked.

“No, I don’t think you have at all because what you had is a consensual tow and you were showing an instance where someone could abuse that consensual tow to commit a felony,” said Dean. “It’s already a felony to steal a car, so there’s nothing gray about that.”

“Sight unseen. No extra proof, no license, no registration, no insurance, no nothing?” asked Zelinger.

“Yes, exactly, because it would be a huge burden for consumers if they had to prove that,” said Dean.

Dean also pointed out common examples that would become hardships for drivers in need of a tow.

He described a businessman who gets a ride to work after his car breaks down. The man then calls a tow company from the office, wanting his car towed from his home to a repair shop. If ownership proof were required, he said the man would have to pay for the tow truck driver to drive to his office, so he could provide proof.

“If we were to impose those rules on the towing industry, it’s only going to unnecessarily burden consumers and cost them more money, and the criminals out there are not going to abide by the rules anyway,” said Dean.

“It doesn’t matter what types of rules or regulations a regulatory agency instills or implements on a tow company, you’re never going to stop illegal activity. You’re always going to have criminals,” said Heald. “I think it’s a good idea to require the proof and we do our due diligence, but there are those times where you just absolutely can’t do it.”

7NEWS also learned tow truck companies are not allowed to run license plates or vehicle identification numbers like a police officer.

“We can’t just arbitrarily just run a plate or VINs by using that system or we’ve committed a felony,” said Heald. “And if we call law enforcement and say, ‘Hey, this is Don from (tow company), can you run this plate because I need to make sure it belongs to Michael?’ They’re going to say, ‘No.’”

Tow truck companies that knowingly and intentionally tow a vehicle in violation of PUC rules can be fined up to $1,100.

“On the example you showed me, they were under the impression it was a consensual tow. There was no intent to commit a crime, so it’s highly unlikely that they would face any charges,” said Dean.

The vehicle in our undercover investigation belonged to a co-worker who knew how the vehicle was being used.

The PUC does not plan on discussing any new regulations as a result of our investigation.
 

Copyright 2013 Scripps Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Article source: http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/undercover-investigation-reveals-thieves-able-to-steal-cars-with-help-of-unsuspecting-tow-companies

Tesla Motors doesn’t want to sell its cars the way every other car company does, and that’s making a lot of traditional automobile dealers mad. And those dealers are fighting back.

Both sides insist they’re only trying to protect car buyers.

What Tesla (TSLA) and its chief executive Elon Musk want to do is to sell its Model S electric sedan directly to consumers rather than using franchised car dealers. General Motors (GM, Fortune 500), Ford (F, Fortune 500), Toyota (TM) and others don’t sell cars to customers. They sell cars to independently owned and operated dealers or distributors who, in turn, sell them to the public, usually after some negotiation over the final price. It’s a system that dates back to the Model T.

By contrast, Tesla’s showrooms, of which there are already 37 around the country, are owned and operated by Tesla Motors. Most of the showrooms are in shopping malls with only enough cars kept in inventory for display and for test drives. Also, there’s no haggling. Every Tesla car sells at full sticker price. Service on the cars is performed at separate garages, also owned by Tesla.

Bill Wolters, president of the Texas Automobile Dealers Association, thinks that’s a horrible idea.

“If Elon Musk wants to have a showroom in a mall, that’s fine,” Wolters said, “but he can’t own it.”

Auto sales are mostly regulated at the state level. In some states, Tesla has had little or no problem opening its stores. In other places, auto dealers and their allies in state government are resisting Tesla’s plans, fearing it could ultimately undermine the system of franchised auto dealers as other automakers will try this, too.

Today, Tesla can’t sell cars in Texas. Tesla has showrooms there, but employees can only show off and explain the car. They can’t give test drives or take orders. They can’t mention the price at all, even if customers ask.

Gallery – 11 must-have options for demanding drivers

Wolters is helping lead the fight in Texas to keep it that way. He’s speaking out against Tesla’s proposal to create an exception to current laws forbidding automaker-owned dealerships.

The current law doesn’t stop anyone in Texas from ordering a Tesla Model S online if they want to. Tesla just can’t deliver it to the customer. The buyer has to arrange for delivery through a third-party shipping company. Online ordering is currently legal in all 50 states.

In North Carolina, though, dealers are pushing to pass a law that would make it illegal for Tesla to sell cars online there. A representative for the North Carolina auto dealers group did not return a call seeking comment on that legislation.

The traditional dealer franchise system is best for car buyers, Wolters insists, because it preserves competition between dealerships selling the same products. It would be difficult for Tesla to maintain its one-price system with competing dealers selling Model S cars.

Jack Gillis, with the Consumer Federation of America, disagrees. Customers actually don’t like haggling over prices, as evidenced by the fact that we haggle over almost nothing else except cars. A one-price system, like Tesla’s, is fairer, Gillis said, because it’s more transparent and doesn’t put less belligerent shoppers at a disadvantage. If the price is too high, customers just won’t buy the product.

But Wolters also cites safety concerns in Tesla owning service centers. If Tesla were to go out of business, the service centers will, too. How, then will Tesla cars get needed repairs and maintenance? And what if there’s a recall?

“When manufacturers discontinue a brand — such as Pontiac, Mercury, Oldsmobile or Saturn — auto dealers still remain to help the customer,” the National Automobile Dealers Association said in a statement. That’s especially important with cars, the NADA said, because unlike computers and other items, poorly serviced cars become a hazard.

But, if Tesla went under, this would be an issue regardless of who owned the service centers, said Jeremy Anwyl, vice chairman of the automotive Web site Edmunds.com. Even if independent dealers were still in business, it would become difficult, if not impossible, to get parts for the cars and personnel would no longer be getting trained on how to fix the cars.

Tesla did not respond to questions about this issue.

For its part, Tesla worries that traditional franchised dealers, who also have gasoline cars to sell, won’t represent its products properly or aggressively enough. Electric cars are new and their benefits require explanation. For car dealers, pressed to make a quick sale, it will be too easy to simply steer customers to gasoline cars rather than bothering to explain the benefits of the Model S, said Diarmuid O’Connell, Tesla’s vice president for business development

“My dealers would love to sell this car!” countered Wolters. “It fills a niche we currently don’t have.”

The Model S is a fairly hot item at the moment, selling well and being lavished with praise by critics. Motor Trend and Automobile magazine named it Car of the Year and Consumer Reports called it the best car they’d ever tested.

Tesla may, in fact, want to use franchised dealers later on, said O’Connell, just not now while the product is still new and not well understood.

“Maybe in the future, when we’re selling hundreds of thousands of vehicles,” he said.

Until then, said O’Connell, Tesla will sell its cars the way it wants. If some states don’t allow that, then Tesla will simply sell them elsewhere.

Article source: http://money.cnn.com/2013/05/20/autos/telsa-car-dealers/index.html

“This is the part I enjoy,” he said, showing off the dark red convertible with body by H.J. Mulliner, of which only 83 were made during the 10-year history of the Silver Cloud. The Silver Cloud was introduced in 1955, and its separate frame made custom coachwork possible. H.J. Mulliner Co. was purchased by Rolls-Royce in 1959.

Stewart’s involvement with imported cars has expanded through the years. He acquired the franchise for Lotus, Maserati and Alfa Romeo in 1979, and Rolls-Royce in 1980. Today, he owns Ferrari-Maserati-Bentley and Lotus of Denver, a thriving exotic-car enterprise in Highlands Ranch, a suburb of Denver.

Stewart’s Silver Cloud II has a 6.23-liter V-8 engine and a General Motors/Rolls-Royce Hydra-Matic automatic transmission. He said the factory records indicate a doctor in Cleveland, Ohio, ordered the car on Valentine’s Day in 1961 and J.S. Inskip in New York imported it.

After two owners, the car remained with its third owner, in Parma, Ohio, for more than 30 years. In 2001, the car went through a frame-off, complete restoration. Stewart said he acquired the car from its fourth owner in 2012, and his shop brought the car to its current state of near perfection.

“I drive our cars home every night,” he said, “checking for anything that might need attention. My crew thinks I am too picky, but I want our cars to be as perfect as they can be.”

Stewart said the Silver Cloud drives unlike any other car. The smoothness, elegance and luxury are uncanny, he said. He should know, because his personal collection includes a 1994 Bentley Continental R, a 1989 Rolls-Royce Corniche convertible and a 2000 Bentley Azure convertible.

His shop just finished an 18-month restoration of a 1962 Bentley Continental Flying Spur sedan, and he brought that car to the Ferrari Club show as well.

If he had to choose between the two, which would be his favorite, the Rolls or the Bentley? He glanced at the Bentley sedan and smiled, but his eyes immediately landed back on the Rolls-Royce.

Article source: http://www.kansascity.com/2013/05/20/4245498/a-passion-for-exotic-cars-becomes.html

Consumers Desire More Automated Automobiles, According to Cisco Study

Cisco report reveals that half of all global consumers surveyed purchase cars based on technology reputation of the brand

SAN JOSE, Calif. – May 14, 2013 – Cisco today announced results of the Cisco Customer Experience Report focused on automobile buying and driving experience. Cisco surveyed more than 1,500 consumers across 10 countries. The global report examined consumer preferences of technology used when buying and driving an automobile. Consumers also identified key influencers preference for car dealers/ manufacturers to provide a more personal driving experience, and their trust in future automotive innovation.

Consumers demonstrated in the survey how information and technology are crucial throughout

the car experience. From the car purchasing experiences to service maintenance, consumers are using more advanced communication technologies (such as mobile, text, telephone, websites, embedded communications devices) to engage with manufactures and car dealerships. Results show roughly half (47%) of global consumers’ value the technology adoption reputation of a brand when selecting a vehicle.

Globally, consumers are eager to see more transportation changes in customization, safety, time, and cost savings, with Brazil, China and India showing significantly more willingness to provide information on driving habits, in exchange for cost and time efficiencies, and may have more trust in driverless automobiles.

Key Highlights:
Prior to purchasing a vehicle, consumers prefer to begin their online.

Most consumers begin their car purchasing process online: 83% of global consumers prefer to research online for information on a car, versus only 17% of consumers that prefer to call or go to dealership.

Trust in Manufacturer Website: 61% use manufacturing websites when researching to purchase a car. This is good news for the digital world as 78% of consumers trust their online research.

Consumers desire a more automated way to track car maintenance costs

Impact of gas prices on customer experience: 52% of consumers want to track gas prices from a vehicle. Gas-price tracking was the highest priority, compared to 46% of consumers wanting to track insurance prices, 35% wanting to track roadside assistance availability, and 32% wanted to track recall information

Tracking car maintenance costs: Consumer demand for tracking vehicle operating costs was shown with 62% of consumers stating they would purchase a device designed to keep them on track with their monthly budget for gas and auto maintenance.

Consumers are willing to trade personal information for customization, security and savings

Lower Insurance/Maintenance: 74% would allow their driving habits to be monitored in order to save on insurance or service maintenance or costs.

More Personal Security: 60% would provide biometric information such as fingerprints and DNA samples in return for personalized security or car security.

Customized Car: 65% would share personal information such as height/weight, driving habits, entertainment preferences if this allowed a more customized vehicle and driving experience.

Consumers Trust in Automated or Driverless Automobiles

Driverless automobiles: More than half of global consumers (57%) stated they would be likely to ride in a car controlled entirely by technology that does not require a human driver. The most trusting consumers in this regard were in Brazil with 96%, India with 86%, and China with 70%.

Kids on board: Consumer trust dropped to 46% when asked if they would let their kids ride in driverless automobiles. Consumers least likely in this regard were in Japan, France, and Germany, where only 6% would allow their kids ride in a driverless automobile.

Supporting Quotes:

Andreas Mai, director of product marketing for Connected Industries Group at Cisco: “Most consumers expect to be connected to the internet wherever they are. Since they may spend much of their time in their car, it stands to reason they want their car to be more connected. This consumer survey confirms that it is time to take the internet to the road and into our cars. “

Peter Granger, Senior Industry Marketing Manager, Cisco Products Solutions Industry Marketing: “The survey shows consumers comfort with technology and need for immediate information whether they are researching, buying, driving or servicing their vehicle. While consumers in diverse parts of the world may expect very different experiences, their technology demand is more positive than many manufacturers imagine. Many consumers are just waiting for manufacturers to respond with better car buying, driving and service experiences augmented by technology”.

Supporting Resources:

Cisco Customer Experience Report website
Other websites……
Social Media: Follow Cisco on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn
Technorati Tags: Cisco, About Cisco Systems

Cisco (NASDAQ: CSCO) is the worldwide leader in networking that transforms how people connect, communicate and collaborate. Information about Cisco can be found at http://www.cisco.com. For ongoing news, please go to http://newsroom.cisco.com.

###

Cisco and the Cisco logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of Cisco and/or its affiliates in the U.S. and other countries. A listing of Cisco’s trademarks can be found at www.cisco.com/go/trademarks. Third-party trademarks mentioned are the property of their respective owners. The use of the word partner does not imply a partnership relationship between Cisco and any other company.

Article source: http://www.autoblog.com/2013/05/19/autonomous-cars-found-trustworthy-in-global-study/